Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 219 - CESTAT MUMBAIEligibilty of exemption - N/N. 16/2000 dt. 01.03.2000 - import of Pulse Sprint Flat Bed Treadmill, Pulse Ascent Elevated Treadmill, Pursuit Cycle and Pace Stepper - classification in dispute - whether the items fall under exemption exemption Entry No. 331 or these items are General Physical Exercise equipments used in gymnasium falling under CTH 95069.90? - duty paid under protest - whether refund claim justified? - Held that: - exemption Notification No. 16/2000-Cus. exempts all goods of Chapter 94 which is required for games and sports, subject to compliance the condition No. 76 of the Notification - exemption is available on the condition that when apex body certifies that the requisites for games and sports are required to be used in a national or international championship or competition to be held in India or abroad. Certificate from Sports Authority of India - the Sports Authority of India has certified the specific imported goods that the said equipments are used for national or international tournaments. In our view, the department has no jurisdiction to question the certificate issued by Sports Authority of India. As per the Condition 76 only certification from the apex body is required, so long that condition is complied with exemption is available to the imported goods. Moreover for the purpose of national or international tournaments, the fitness of the player is the primary criteria for preparing to face the competition of national or international tournaments. Therefore it cannot be said that these fitness equipments are not used by the appellant for national or international tournaments. We are therefore of the considered view that on the basis of certificate dt. 14.6.2000 issued by Sport Authority of India addressed to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Bombay in respect of equipments imported by the appellant exemption notification is clearly admissible to the appellant - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|